From the 3D Panic to the AI Fever
The 2000 Panic: When 3D Was Going to Kill Us (And How AI is Repeating History
The Echo of the “End of Art”
If you work in the creative field, you probably feel a sense of déjà vu. Every few years, a new technology emerges, and panic ensues. Today, the protagonist of every conversation is “Generative AI.” We see headlines proclaiming the end of design, illustration, and animation. But I’ve already lived through this movie, and the script sounds very familiar.
To understand what will happen with AI, we have to travel back to the year 2000: the era of the great “3D Bubble.”
The Failure of the “All-In Bet”
In the late 90s and early 2000s, after the earthquake that was Toy Story, the animation industry panicked. 2D, the industry’s pillar for a century, was declared “dead.” The new religion was 3D, and studios launched into a frantic race to convert or die.
Astronomical sums of money were invested in the belief that technology, by itself, was the answer.
The most emblematic case of this bubble wasn’t a success, but a colossal failure: Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001). It was a titanic project that cost $137 million of the time, an all-in bet on 3D photorealism. The result was a financial disaster so great it bankrupted its studio, Square Pictures.
The industry bet everything on 3D as the replacement for everything else, and it nearly took down giants who forgot the most important thing: stories and art, beyond the tool.
The Parallel with AI (And the Great Difference)
Today, Generative AI occupies the place 3D once held. It’s presented to us as the imminent replacement. However, this is where the parallel gets more interesting, not because of its similarities, but because of its great difference: the barrier to entry.
In 2000, 3D was framed as a career of the future that demanded immense technical preparation.
- It required expensive, prohibitive hardware.
- The software (like Maya, 3ds Max, or Softimage) had a brutal learning curve, taking months or even years.
- It was a tool for specialists, not for the public.
In contrast, 2024’s AI is presented in the opposite way:
- It’s not presented as a career, but as a mass-consumer gadget.
- It runs on your phone or in a web browser.
- The barrier to entry is almost nil: “write a sentence and press a button.”
3D was a high-friction production tool; AI is a low-friction consumption tool. 3D demanded you be a technician before an artist; AI seems to tell you that you don’t need to be anything, just have an idea (or not even that).
Integration is the Real Revolution
So, what finally happened with 3D? Did it kill 2D?
No. The panic faded, and the bubble burst. What remained was not a replacement, but an integration. 3D wasn’t the end; it was another path.
It integrated into the artistic ecosystem. Today, it’s unthinkable to see a 2D animated film that doesn’t use 3D for backgrounds, vehicles, or cameras (like in the spectacular Klaus). And 3D has benefited enormously from 2D principles to be more expressive (like in the masterpiece Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse).
3D stopped being an end in itself and became what it always should have been: a powerful tool in the artist’s toolbox.
And that, exactly that, is what will happen with AI.
Toward More and Better
Generative AI is not the end of art; it’s the expansion of the canvas. The initial panic, the speculative fever, and the social media hype will pass. What will remain is a tool.
A tool that will allow 2D animators to create richer backgrounds, concept artists to explore ideas at unthinkable speeds, and independent studios to compete with the big leagues. AI will not replace the artist; it will become the strangest and most powerful brush we’ve ever had.
In the end, technology doesn’t subtract; it adds. The ecosystem becomes more complex, richer, and more interesting. 2D, 3D, stop motion, and now AI… everything is moving toward more and better.